Proceeding contribution from Lord Herbert of South Downs (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 8 July 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Bill.
Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Bill
That goes to the heart of the dilemma that we are confronting. The principle set out in the Bill is that a judge must be satisfied about a number of considerations, including a defendant's general right to know the identity of a witness, before allowing the use of anonymous evidence. Those tests are in the Bill precisely to restrict the use of such evidence. Some may disagree, but I think that most Members agree that the use of anonymous evidence will not necessarily be a bar to a fair trial. The Opposition believe that it is right to allow judges to make the decision, subject to the tests that Parliament will set out.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 478 c1313
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Disclosure of information Admissibility of evidence Criminal proceedings Appeals Crime Common law Evidence Human rights European Convention on Human Rights House of Lords Intimidation Judgements Protection Sentencing Witnesses Trials Sunset clauses
- Legislation
- Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Bill 2007-08
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2025-01-04 09:30:54 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_494637
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_494637
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_494637